The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1887-06-05
THE CITIZEN.
A Comparison of Ancient and Modern Con-
ceptions of True Citizenship.

calculated to enlichten and elevate the American
citizen. With our busy lives and with i'm
portation Of people and ideas from every degree
of civilization upon the face of the earth,
need now and then to sit down and calmly
slider some such questions these: IL. How
does our modern conception of citizenship com
pare with the conception of other agesl r.
How does the American conception compare
with that of other nations2 49, What is the
true conception of citizenship? a. What
some of the prominent dangers to the working
out OF this ideal in American civilization (5.l
How counteract these dangers! An intelligent
and conscientious consideration of these
questions but be beneficial.
Such consideration will enlarge our conceptions
of the citizens privileges, awaken an interest In
his duties. and insure activity in the exercise
of all the functions peculiar TO him. Let US
first compare the modern with the ancient or
classic conception of the citizen: 1t IS pleasant
to view our future from Fourth of July stand
point sometimes; but possl bly, not the most proht
able. Eternal vigilance is the price of national
life and health We must not neglect the lamp
of experience nor fail to understand the present,
if we would build we'll for the future.
To be citizen meant something when the
loccian of the New Testament answered the
captain of the Roman guard, Il am a citizen OF
no mean city" He meant that he had rights
and powers which he proposed to ex-
ercse Citizenship meant something in the
first century in the Roman empire. 1t means
more in the nineteenth century IN this American
Republic. Then AMMAN might gain citizenship
by purchase, by favor. by valor, by manumlssion
or by inheritance. Now become citizens by
birth or by asserting allegiance to our govern
ment The American theory is that citizenship
is natural right and important duty.
citizen of Rome could not be bound or
imprisoned without formal trial. The smallest
per cent, however of the people were citizens,
and the individual who hadn't this distinction
had scarcely any rights. In our country no one
can be bound or imprisoned without a formal
trial. The Roman citizen could appeal
from local courts 20 the higher In
this country all have the right of
appeal. We have also the privilege of
voting for officers aud we may hold Office The
citizen is entitled to protection IN the exercise
and in the enjoyment of his rights. In our Re-
public, man, woman and child are entitled TO
the protection of the laws. 1t was not always
so in Rome. The conception of citizenship has
not escaped ubiquitous evolution. 1t Will be oe-
served. The Roman conception was IN advance
of that of many other nations which existed up
to that time, and yet the privileges of the
Romans were meagre compared with those or
the American. Under that power man must
and go at the behests of his sovereign.
Under our form of government the people are
the sovereigns. This was illustrated s ONE years
ago In Massachusetts There had been large
gathering of the people certain occa-
sion. Some red-sashed officers of the day
came along to the place where the crowd was
dense. and finding 1t almost impossible to pro-
coed, cried out, MAKE way for the representa-
tives OF the people, Some in the crowd
with the American instinct, retorted, "Make
way for the people themselves"
In Rome, prior TO the time of Constantine and
the introduction OF the Justinian CODE a father
could murder his own children or his wife, and
the laws took no notice of IT. A foul murder
committed one OCCASION Some slave
suspected, but there were 200 slaves and no
clew to the guilty one The 200 were butchered
in cold blood in order that the guilty one might
not escape. Our code holds that it is better that
the guilty escape than that one innocent person
should suffer.
Liberty forms an important part of citizenship
With the ancients liberty consisted largely in
the part the individual had to do with the gov
eminent. With US the conception has little TO
do with the forms of authority. but insure the
right of protection in wider sphere of action,
and in a larger living
With Aristotle perfect liberty meant perfect
equality. With the ancients the individual had
right as against the State. The state was
everything In this country the individual Is
everything. His rights protected both by
constitutional enactment and by judicial organ
izaton. Among the Greeks, for instance, the
judiciary meant, oftentmes, the within or tho
mob, at other times it meant the prejudice and
cruelty of the sovereign.
AS Louis XIV, OF France,
in his time both sovereign and court,
it ottentimes with the anciens- The
Greeks educated the individual for the ate; for
its prese. walton. We hold that education is for
the purpose of developing the individual. for the
cultivation of his powers, for the suppression OF
that which is evil in him, and for the purpose of
bringing out that which is best and most useful.
He has splendid mission before him under our
form Of government. His education must be of
such a nature that he will become the most in
develop large-hearted and large Drained man.
well grounded upon moral principles. We
would prepare him for the largest sphere of
usefulness in this life and for his final destiny,
as we'll We would educate him for
the sake of manhood. then for
society and then for the state This gives Us
the worlds man. Sometimes the largest liberty
of the ancients meant but little To illustrate:
Among the Cretans the young men were trained,
at certain age. to do for themselves. They
were required TO be married at the same time,
under certain penalties To remain unmarried il
certain Greek states was crime In this age OF
old bachelors such law might be considered
cruel To marry woman under a certain size
was contrary to the Spartan laws King
Archidamus was himself fined for taking too
small wife. The ancients had some ideas.
however, which were suggestive For instance:
If young man preferred a rich girl to a poor
one. the laws hungry to APP
prehend him. The man who did not and
law. They used to punish a man in Sparta for
buying things for less than the state held them
to be worth. The Lacedemonians allowed no
trades. Boards of trade and bucket shops"
could not have existed under that civilization.
Turning for moment from what might be
termed the classical conception OF the rights OF
the citizen to the Hebrew, we find some points
of difference. The Hebrew radical Not
OILY cid he support the theocracy, but no must
pe a devout worshper He compelled to
have a religion. His nation legisated God
into existence The Greek might worship any
one of a thousand gods. The Hebrew came I'M
der the law if he denied the existence of
He must love his country and
give material aid to it's support, we'll He
expected to offer his life sacrifice upon his
country's alter if invasion conquest de-
manded it. He must exact money of the
poor, commit immoralities and have rover
for the past and for superiors Certain
features of Hebrew citizenship would be consid-
cred an innovation in our hherty-loving Nation.
Aristotle held that no man ought to think
anything of himself. that he had any rights as
an individual He created for the state and
existed for its benefit alone. Marriage was
looked upon a civil contract, the sole end of
which increase the population. Both
Lycurgus and Plato held that the children be-
longed TO the state. Naturally men had no
rights, but the state might grant some prlvi-
ieges to the wealthy and to the powerful
Said Aristotle: Citizenship belongs only to
those who not obliged to work for living.
In that age citizenship cost large sums
How different is the American conception. In
this country hold that the state exists for
the good of the individuals in the state; not the
individuals for the state. American institu-
ia enualiIy O. Neither